What is your favorite developer for hp5+?

[bruce_appel]

I have been shooting 35mm hp5+, and have settled on hc110 at 1:60

dilution as my standard. I am not completely happy with this combo, I

think I should be getting better resolution, and the high lights tend

to be real contrasty. Not a bad combo, but I think it is time to try

something different. In the past I tried rodinol, but find it too

grainy for 35mm. I also tried pyrocat hd and to make a long story

short drove myself nuts and never got it to work well.

So, what is your favorite developer for hp5+, and why?

[barry_wilkinson1]

I use dilute Perceptol for HP5+. It produces fine grain and very sharp results. Film speed is down to around 160 though.

 

Unfortunately Ilford may not produce this any more? I understand that Moersch EFG developer is an exact copy but I have yet to try it.

 

Barry

[jeff_drew4]

Bruce,<p>

I have used HP5+ with Rodinal and also found the results grainy, but I like Rodinal

and use it more for the medium speeds, which is what it's best for. I also have used

D76/ID11, HC110, Acufine, and Perceptol with HP5. I really could not bond with any

of those combos (purely my artistic feeling) and just don't use HP5 any more. My best

result was with D76/ID11 in terms of all-around, consistent results. HP5+ is a fine

film, but Tri-X is my preference and I may use any of 5 developers depending on my

purposes.

[frank.schifano]

Simple. D-76 or ID-11 diluted 1+1 (very good) or XTOL at any dilution from 1+1 to 1+3 (even better). Avoid Rodinal with this film. It's not a good combination.

[max zappa]

I am afraid I cannot give an opinion on different developers for HP5, but what I can say is that I was happy with Ilfords ID-11, grain and all. When I say I was, thats because I am now trying the Kodak D76 version which is supposed to be the same, because of the lack of availability of Ilford Chemicals.

As for contrasty shots, you may wish to consider exposing HP5 at EI 200, or even EI 160 (Ansel Adams, Fred Picker to name but 2) and reducing development time accordingly. I think it is acknowledged that overdevelopment produces contrasty negatives and certainly relying on manufacturers recommended development times is most unsatisfactory. Conducting development tests is the only way to reliably establish appropriate development times for your personal film speed and developer combination. I am currently re-testing for my personal EI for HP5 and then will be testing for the appropriate development time in D76, at 1:1 dilution.

[berk_sirman2]

If you are planning to push this film to 800 or 1600 try Microphen. I have been pleased with the results.

[jonathan_bundick]

You would be hard pressed to find a better combo than D76 1:1. The grain is not escessive for a 400 film, but enought to know it is there. Very good smooth tones, and consistant results.

[lee_shively]

D76 is the only developer I've ever used with HP5+. I use it 1:1 and 1:3 for both 35mm and 120. Mostly 1:3. Grain is not a major concern to me. I'm currently being tempted to try Rodinal.

[User_502260]

I think you can see from the responses so far that the developer you would use with HP-5+ depends on the type of subject, the exposure index you use and personal taste. For most regular uses and with an exposure index of 400 I would recommend Paterson Aculux-2 at the 1:9 dilution. It gives a very nice compromise between sharpness and grain. It is widely available and doesn't cost very much. Kodak D-76, either straight or 1:1, also does a nice job at 400. As you must have read before, the 1:1 dilution will give slightly coarser grain and slightly higher sharpness. If you want special effects you can use other developers. The fine grain developers like Ilford Perceptol and Kodak Microdol-X will give finer grain but you will lose about half of your film speed of you use them full strength. By diluting them 1:3 you will get better sharpness and the full film speed but the grain will not be as fine.

 

If you don't mind slightly more grain and like the extra sharpness and speed of phenidone based developers then these can be good choices. Phenidone based developers include Ilford Microphen, Ilford DD-X, Clayton F60, Nacco Super 76, Acufine and others. Most photographers who have used it say that Microphen increases the speed of HP-5+ from 400 to about 650. Ilford provides developing times for various speeds with Microphen. I like the phenidone based developers for rating HP-5+ at higher speeds. You can experiment with these.

 

Kodak X-tol also contains phenidone but works with a form of ascorbic acid (vitamin C). I am not a big X-tol fan but may posters here are and they have obtained good results with this developer exposing HP-5+ at various speeds. If you are a tinkerer you might like to mix up a batch of Patrick Gainer's now famous PC-TEA developer. It will give a slightly grainier result with fast films like HP-5+ but the grain pattern is tight and sharp.

 

There is probably more interest in different developer combinations with fast films than with medium and slow speed films. If you are using 35mm film and are making an 8X10 enlargement with little cropping then the slow and medium speed films will look about the same with any developer. Once you get past 8X10 you will see differences. With fast film (400 or faster) these differences will show up even in an 8X10.

[henry_a]

Xtol is an outstanding developer for HP5. Try this - HP5 at 320, Xtol 1:3 for 16-18 minutes. Be sure to use at least 100ml of stock for each roll of film. That means that for one roll of 35mm you'll use at least 400ml of working solution so use it in a 500ml tank or larger so the solution can move when you agitate. Agitiate -gently- for the first minute then once a minute. Just turn the tank over a couple of times and set it down. I think this will answer your needs.

[evangelos_koutsavdis]

I use DD-X

[Troll]

Diafine. High speed, low grain, incredibly sharp, compensating effect in highlights.

[peter_schrager]

I second acculux and xtol although xtol is what I use for my 4x5 and 5x7 film. It will give give true speed ratings. With acculux the asa will increase. Both give beautiful negatives as this is already a great film.

Peter

[trooper]

DD-X seems ideal. I've also had solid results with D76 1:1 and FG7. Looking over some old negatives recently I was reminded of the nice results I was getting some years back with Aculux, too. I recently eperimented with Hogan's Prescysol and various films. It was quite nice with the HP5 and was great at taming contrasty scenes, the stain was easy to use with VC papers, tight grain, and very easy printing.

[jim_appleyard]

Devving HP5 in Rodinal worked for me. I go by looks, not scientific data and the negs I got looked good and were easy to print. I know others think this combo is awful, but try it, how much have you got to lose?

[gwilburn]

I like 'new' Tri-X and Rodinal 1:50. A little grainy (not nearly as grainy as 'old' Tri-X) but razor sharp. I'm also becoming a fan of Neopan 400 and Rodinal 1:50

[andrew_hull]

Barry:

 

Microdol really IS the same as Perceptol. I suggest taht you try it unless some geographic

reason precludes you from trying it.

 

Cheers.

[klix]

At 800 EI, Diafine.

 

At nominal EI, I've been trying a few developers -- HC-110, Ilfosol, DD-X, D76, Rodinal, but I think I'm ready to go back to XTOL 1+2.

[john_elder1]

I am currently using Hc110 to develop my Hp5+. I have used Hp5 and Hp5+ as my main film for all formats for 18 years. If your highlights are "too contrasty" perhaps you are overdeveloping the film which would also cause less resolution. Try reducing your developing time and rate the film at EI 320. I use the HC110 at 1:49 in a 5 reel paterson tank and develop for 7 minutes at 68deg. The resolution is good. Best developer I used was FG7 with the 15% sodium sulfite solution. I found that to be just a tad better. However I had trouble getting the FG7 and needed to use another developer and now I like the Hc110. The Hc110 is better than the FG7 without sulfite.

[bruce_appel]

Thanks you for all the responses. To clarify, when I say the highlights tend to be contrasty, what I see is that if I nail the time/temp/agitation to get good shadow detail and mid range tonality, the highlights tend to be contrasty. When I cut the development to tame the highlights, the mid tones get muddy and I loose shadow detail.Like I said, not bad, but I think I can do better.I have shot several hundred feet of this film with this developer, and have come up with an ei of 320, hc 110 1:60, 10 minutes at 70 degrees. Agitate first 30 seconds, 5 seconds every 30 sec from then on.

Interesting to see so many use D76, that was all I used 20 years ago, maybe time to go back.

Xtol looks worth trying also. Again, thanks for all the responses.

[marek sramek]

I used to develop HP5+ in ID-11 (1:1), but now I prefer Xtol (1:1).

[chris_gittins]

I've used HP5+ with D76 (1+2, 68 F) and DDX (1+9, 68 F). I like both combos but find it a bit more convenient to work with the DDX liquid stock. I've had crystalization problems with D76 stock when my darkroom gets cold in the winter - no such issues with DDX. The DDX also gives about half a stop additional speed. Several points in favor of D76: it's very inexpensive and more likely to be on the shelf at your local photo store.

 

Chris

[robert_marvin]

HP5+ is a great film and will probably give good results in most any developer. FWIW, I've been very happy with the results I get from straight D 23 (a simple mix-it-yourself brew using only two chemicals--metol and sodium sulphite). Recently I've been getting even better results (IMO) with a split version of D-23 where the first bath is straight D 23 and the second is a 20 percent borax solution (regular supermarket "20 Mule Team" borax). The results are rather low in contrast (and require a no. 3 or 3.5 filter with my condensor enlarger) but produce beautiful prints. Here (I hope) is an example: